Orissa High Court
CMP/934/2016 of SULOCHANA MOHANTY Vs BABAJI CHARAN PANI on 28 July 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No. 934 of 2016 1.Sulochana Mohanty 2.Ahalya Mohanty 3.Pratima Parija 4.Sanjaya Mohanty 5.Namita Mohanty …. Petitioners None -versus- 1.Babaji Charan Pani 2.Tara Dei 3.Kalyani Pani 4.All Orissa State Bank 5.Secretary all Odisha State Bank
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CMP No. 934 of 2016
1.Sulochana Mohanty
2.Ahalya Mohanty
3.Pratima Parija
4.Sanjaya Mohanty
5.Namita Mohanty
….
Petitioners
None
-versus-
1.Babaji Charan Pani
2.Tara Dei
3.Kalyani Pani
4.All Orissa State Bank
5.Secretary all Odisha State Bank
Officers Housing Co-operative Society
Ltd, Bhubaneswar
6.Mani Tirumala Projects Pvt. Ltd.
….
Opp. Parties
Mr. Somjit Das, Advocate
on behalf of Mr. Tanmay Mishra, Advocate (for O.P. Nos. 4 &5)
CORAM:
HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Order No.
05. 28.07.2026
(Through hybrid Mode)
1. None appears for the Petitioner when the matter is called.
2. Mr. Somjit Das, learned counsel is present on behalf of Mr. Tanmay Mishra, learned counsel for the Opposite Party Nos. 4 and 5.
3. This CMP has been filed challenging the order dated 02.05.2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior
Division), Bhubaneswar in Civil Suit No. 1437 of 2011 (Annexure-5). Vide the said order the application filed by the plaintiffs, who are the Petitioners herein under Order 26 Rule 9 of the CPC praying to depute a Civil Court Commissioner for measurement and demarcation of the suit land, has been rejected.
4. On 03.08.2016, this matter had been directed to be listed with FAO No. 94 of 2013.
5. No interim order has been passed in this case staying further proceedings in the suit.
6. In view of the fact that no counsel appears on behalf of the Petitioners and no interim order has been passed in the CMP staying further proceedings in the FAO, it can safely be presumed that in the meanwhile, the Civil Suit has been disposed of. The CMP is therefore dismissed.
7. It is open to the Petitioner to file an application for revival of the CMP/recall of this order, in case cause of action still survives.
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Subhalaxmi
Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHALAXMI PRIYADARSHANI SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 29-Jul-2026 11:50:31 Signature Not Verified